News

Muslim school in London spied on pupils in its toilets area

Muslim school in London spied on pupils in its toilets area

Sexism, poor hygiene and, disturbingly, a CCTV camera in the toilet area at the independent Darul Hadis Latifiah school for boys in Bethnal Green has led to its downgrading by education watchdog Ofsted.

According to the BBC, Ofsted inspectors pupils were not being:

Prepared for life in modern Britain.

In addition to the camera, Inspectors found “grimy” facilities and “inappropriate” literature.

The school, for boys aged 11 to 20, said it was “preparing a formal complaint” in response to the inspection which it branded:

Excessively negative.

It also claimed said the camera only viewed the “washing area”.

But Ofsted reported the camera was found “in the communal area of the toilets” and displayed images in “plain view” of the reception area.

Changing rooms and showers were labelled “grimy and disgusting” after mouse droppings and sharp metal were found on the floor.

During a two-and-a-half day inspection in October a book was found in the school library that:

Promoted inappropriate views of how girls and women should behave.

School leaders said they were “unaware” of the book’s presence, but claimed the book referred to the belief women should “dress modestly”.

Ofsted concluded that “there are too few opportunities to learn about women in modern society” at the school.

Very few pupils were able to name “the new British Prime Minister or were aware of the first female presidential candidate in the elections taking place in the United States of America” during the inspection.

Respect for women was taught, but was limited “to the roles of motherhood and families” during Islamic studies, the report added.

Some pupils told the inspector that if they asked questions about sex and relationships they would get a detention.

Inspectors concluded the government’s flagship counter-terrorism strategy was not being implemented at the school.

Failing to identify any risks to pupils in line with the government’s “Prevent strategy” left pupils “exposed to being drawn into situations which put them at risk of harm”, Ofsted concluded.

Badrul Islam, secretary to the school’s governing board, said the school did “not accept most of the findings”.

We know our whole mission is to prepare our pupils for life in British society as good British Muslims.

In a statement issued today, the school, set up to benefit pupils “both in this world and in Akhirah (the afterlife)” insists that it does prepare its pupils to be model British citizens, but, in line with other single-sex faith schools discourages social interaction with females.

We are currently preparing a formal complaint to Ofsted about the way the inspection was conducted and judgements were made. While we accept that there were a few failings affecting the judgement on safeguarding leading to an overall ‘inadequate’ judgement, we have good reason to believe that the report is excessively negative and does not give an accurate picture of our students’ attainment and progress. Nor does it give an accurate picture of the overall quality of teaching, and of parents’ views of the school’s performance.

When parents place their children in our single-sex school, they do not expect the school to plan opportunities for their sons to socialise with girls. One of their motives is to safeguard their children from what they see as the dangers of teenage culture in our society dominated by permissiveness. Parents in other faith schools hold the same views and share the opinion that teenagers work best in single-sex schools. We are not aware that Ofsted inspectors have made the same judgement about other single-sex schools.

As for the camera, the school says it has now been removed. It was only put there to watch pupils:

Perform their ritual ablutions (wudu) before prayers.

20 responses to “Muslim school in London spied on pupils in its toilets area”

  1. L.Long says:

    “…pupils were not being: Prepared for life in modern Britain….” WELL! DAH!!!
    Its a religious school, of course they were not being prepared for much of anything!!

  2. Paul says:

    “We know our whole mission is to prepare our pupils for life in British society as good British Muslims.”
    No it bloody well should not be.
    It should be to allow them ONLY be good at being British – being Muslim is not a required element to be British and immediately alienates and segregates them.

  3. 1859 says:

    Catholic faith ‘schools’;muslim faith ‘schools’;buddhist faith ‘schools’; sheikh faith ‘schools’; mormon faith ‘schools’;jw faith ‘schools’; jewish faith ‘schools’;FSM faith ‘schools’.
    No matter which benign pair of spectacles you view these ‘schools’ with, for all intents and purposes they are nothing more than centres of religious indoctrination. Vive la France! where this sort of shit does not happen! Why do children not have the human right to be free of religious influence until they reach the age of consent? This is hideous and the UK is storing up a future filled with sectarian conflict that will make what happened in Northern Ireland in the 70s and 80s seem like a dance with the sugar plum fairy.

  4. Trevor Blake says:

    “During a two-and-a-half day inspection in October a book was found in the school library that: ‘Promoted inappropriate views of how girls and women should behave.'”

    I can’t imagine what book in a Muslim school that might match that description.

  5. Trevor Blake says:

    “One of their motives is to safeguard their children from what they see as the dangers of teenage culture in our society dominated by permissiveness.”

    If only there were Muslim nations somewhere on Earth that the authors of this statement could go to. Then they and their children can be in a society not dominated by permissiveness. Oh, if only there were. Instead, thousands of people from somewhere, not sure where, are pouring into Europe. Turns out where they are from is a pest hole of their own making. Hmmm. Not sure what to make of all this.

  6. Stan says:

    Terrorist Incubator.

  7. Stan says:

    Simple Answer … Ban faith schools. It’s appalling that we know exactly why the pious want to get their hooks into kids and yet we still allow it, even encourage them and sponsor them.

    Close them all now. All of them.

  8. Stan says:

    Onward Muslim soldiers.
    Actually going to war.
    With the guns of allah
    Shooting all before.
    Suicide vests and mortars.
    Killing kuffars by the score.

    And so on.

    You know the tune.

  9. Craig says:

    Spot the next hate preacher.

  10. Tony says:

    He’s the one with the facial bum fluff .

    And don’t they all look so happy

  11. Tony says:

    According to the BBC, Ofsted inspectors pupils were not being:
    Prepared for life in modern Britain.

    No they are being prepared to go out into an inclusive equal welcoming prosperous society and to burden it with hatred and division and malice and bring it to its kness ripe for conversion into a primitive backward failed sharia dominated shitehole … you know just like all the other highly successful muslim dominated countries where most muslims are trying to either escape from or destroy.

  12. Tony says:

    Caption competition.
    The one in centre front row looking down at his list.

    Sir, on this paradise list it says we will get 75 virgins.
    I want mine with big tits, blond hair and blue eyes like the ones Mr Ahmed watches on his iPad when he’s on the staff bog.

  13. bobL says:

    Religious indoctrination before the age of consent is one of the most serious and long lasting forms of child abuse. We will look back on the practice in the future with horror and disgust. Faith schools should have been abolished decades ago.

  14. remigius says:

    “…or were aware of the first female presidential candidate in the elections taking place in the United States of America…”

    This question would have stumped many grown-ups too. Hillary Clinton was not the first female presidential candidate. That honour goes to Victoria Woodhull in 1872.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Victoria_Woodhull

  15. tonye says:

    That’s taking the piss…..

    I’ll get my coat……….

  16. John says:

    I conclude that the UK government finds these places useful for the purpose of mind-washing young boys so they will go on and serve in the ranks of ISIS and similar terrorist groups.
    The difference being that they will be “our” terrorists.
    The so-called “white” helmets in Syria are “our” terrorists.
    They were set up by an ex-British army officer.
    They continue to be funded with UK taxpayers money.
    These things don’t happen for no good reason.
    Now do you see how this “thing” works?

  17. terry says:

    HI all If I may ask have you signed Anne Marie Walters petition? If not please do so, thank you http://www.shariawatch.org.uk/?q=content/close-sharia-courts-set-uk-and-make-sharia-law-illegal-britain?

  18. barriejohn says:

    Terry: Much as I abhor Sharia Law, how can it possibly be “banned”? Will Jewish Beth Din be banned as well? Will it be illegal for all religious groups, and secular clubs and societies, to discipline members? And what about trades unions and political parties – will they be barred from holding tribunals of any kind? This is an illiberal idea that sounds great when first mooted, but I don’t even see any practical way that it can be enforced, because the rulings of priests, imams, rabbis and elders is going to be respected in any case. We need a better way to deal with the scourge of religious oppression.

  19. John says:

    You raise a very interesting point.
    While most people in this country are aware of sharia tribunals (not ‘courts’) they are much less aware of the existence of Jewish Beth Din tribunals (not ‘courts’).
    The reason for this I believe is due to the fact that the Jews realised long ago that flaunting their religious views, values and institutions would result in resentment on the part of the much larger indigenous community they exist in.
    Consequently, they have created a situation where they keep very much to themselves, avoiding unnecessary publicity of any kind.
    The younger more hot-headed and evangelical Muslims on the other hand tend to seek greater publicity and flaunt their ideas, views and institutions publicly as part of a proselytisation exercise, which the mass media are only too happy to publicise for their own reasons.
    What we all have to do is point out that any religious tribunal’s decisions are not binding legally and they have only religious significance and not legal significance.
    The Church of England (and, presumably, other churches in the Anglican fold) also have their own courts called consistory courts, which – these days – tend to only make decisions which affect church buildings and grounds.
    Nevertheless, there is a real danger that under changed circumstances, all these various types of religious tribunals could try to elevate to themselves some sort of legal or para-legal status, which must be resisted.
    Who knows whether or not Sikhs and Hindus have any similar kinds of their own bodies?
    Ultimately, what needs to happen is for individual Jews, Muslims and Christians to sue any tribunals that make decisions which affect them negatively, possibly under the law of tort, and seek compensation from them for any damages they have sustained.
    This would would then reinforce the fact that only UK law courts are places where the law is decided and that all these tribunals are not places where that can occur.

  20. andym says:

    Not totally OT, there’s been the usual outcry from the safe spaces about this:

    http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/real-housewives-of-isis-bbc-controversy-outrage-twitter-muslims-asian-hijabi-terrorism-duty-satire-a7511261.html

    It’s actually pretty funny.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *